Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: The Far Western Slavyane

Expand Messages
  • Alastair Millar
    ... Yo. And other hip words. ... They did, but the map of the approximate dispositions of the Slavic tribes in Germany and Bohemia that resulted seems to have
    Message 1 of 17 , Aug 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, "Ben McGarr" <benmcgarr@d...> wrote:
      > Privet Alastair!

      Yo. And other hip words.

      > Shame. But surely someone has made a
      > halfway decent attempt?

      They did, but the map of the approximate dispositions of the Slavic
      tribes in Germany and Bohemia that resulted seems to have vaporised
      from the web in the last year or so... and my own downloaded copy
      seems to have vanished as well. I vaguely recall having sent it to
      someone on this list at some point... could they please raise their
      hand, if so?

      > I gather the tribal names are for the most
      > part based on river names,
      > so shouldn't the watersheds give a good idea?

      Er, no. Some river names are based on Slavic names (like the Saale),
      but other than the general term "Polabian" (meaning 'living along the
      Labe', i.e. Elbe) - which was applied to, rather than used by, the
      groups concerned - this doesn't seem accurate to me.

      > True, but I'm casting my nets as widely as possible.

      A net with holes that large is probably only going to catch dolphins -
      or confuse the hell out of the cod... ;-)

      > I unfortunately have only the barest minimum of a
      > command of German

      Likewise. Using the English terms is usually a good start tho' ;-)

      > Rastislav being a Moravian, yes.

      Indeed.

      > But here we are dealing with old German use of the name.
      > Clumsy as it may be, it seems to me that modern historians
      > tend to use it in this specific way, and there
      > aren't many Frankish or OHG speakers around to argue!

      Modern historians recognise that 'Wend' is a synonym for 'Slav',
      while 'Sorbs' are a specific group. It's really the same word
      as 'Serb'.

      > How else should we term these non Czech, non Lech,
      > Western-Slovene?

      Using the assorted other tribal names that are known? Consider the
      case of the Luchans of West Bohemia...

      > I can read Russian a little, and so this is the
      > medium for most of what I know of Slavonic ethnohistory,

      The immediate caution would have to be... "beware the Pan-Slavist!";
      followed shortly afterwards by all the usual warnings about the
      reliability of sources. I'm sure that others on the list can provide
      references for further reading material when you finish whatever
      you're reading at the moment! Slovo, the SIG newsletter, also
      includes some book reviews (http://slavic.freeservers.net iirc).

      > moment uses Wend-Sorb-Luzhitsky Serb in this
      > rather indiscriminate way.

      Tsk.

      > It's intended for the general reader though, so we
      > mustn't be too harsh.

      I disagree there... even the general reader deserves to be provided
      with accurate information.

      > So you're saying that only some of the Laba-Odra
      > Slavyane ever bore this name?

      Correct.

      > As their very name suggests, these latter lived on
      > the Laba [Elbe, Albis],

      Er, no. As noted above, 'Polabian' is a label of geographical
      convenience only. Roman Zaroff, for example, in his excellent (and
      now classic) essay on the Germanisation of the Slavs - apparently
      available online only at http://luzicane.h1.ru/RZaroff.html these
      days - notes the division of the Polabian Slavs into the Obodrite,
      Veleti and Sorbs.

      > and so represent the westward
      > push of the Slavs here, not the northern.

      This makes me uneasy, because of the implied assumption that the
      Slavs were some kind of unified people when they turned up in Europe,
      their differences only arising after their diffusion. This is
      something that I personally don't accept, given the latest work done
      in Bohemia (suggesting that, for example, there were two influxes of
      culturally different Slavs some 2 centuries apart).

      It also suggests a movement/invasion of a people en masse, whereas
      the diffusion suggested by, for example, Prague-type pottery was much
      more gentle.

      > You're probably right, although might not the
      > Obodrites be as good a bet? THey were also very
      > active in giving out princesses to all the
      > surrounding Germanic dynasties, like the Polaks and
      > Pomorane.

      Well the politics of the period was all about marriage alliances...
      so most ruling families would have done the same. The Premyslids in
      Bohemia certainly did.

      > Am I correct in my impression that the Mecklenburg
      > Wends were the descendants of these Obodrites?

      Probably. This is rather out of my area (Bohemia) though, so don't
      hold me to it.

      > I have heard this, but could you tell me where
      > you got the exact information from?

      Erk, nope... just part of the general 'background noise' I seem to
      have picked up over the years...

      > I must confess I've only read the relevant part of
      > Carlyle's Histroy of Friedrich the Great on the Wends'
      > history [book two, first couple of chapters - a very
      > entertaining read from our second greatest British
      > historian [after Gibbon], I heartily
      > recommend it].

      I was always rather fond of Trevelyan, personally... nice to see
      another vagrant Brit on the list though *g*.

      Meantime, you might like to take a look at:

      http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/shepherd/german_settlements_
      800_1400.jpg
      This shows Upper & Lower Lusatia very clearly.

      http://www.euratlas.com/big/big0700.htm
      One of a series of not-very-detailed maps from Euratlas.com that
      nevertheless provides some useful information. Try the maps for the
      centuries up to 1000 as well.

      Hope all this helps

      Alastair
    • Ben McGarr
      ... Now, Alastair, I wouldn t dream of competing with you on that score, so you ll have to be contented with a simple Hello this time! ... Saale), ... the
      Message 2 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, "Alastair Millar" <alastair@i...> wrote:
        > Yo. And other hip words.

        Now, Alastair, I wouldn't dream of competing with you on that score,
        so you'll have to be contented with a simple 'Hello' this time!

        > Er, no. Some river names are based on Slavic names (like the
        Saale),
        > but other than the general term "Polabian" (meaning 'living along
        the
        > Labe', i.e. Elbe) - which was applied to, rather than used by, the
        > groups concerned - this doesn't seem accurate to me.

        Well, I can do no better than to give you what I've got so what do
        you think of these?;

        Ruf' Ageeva [kandidat filologicheskikh nauk], in her 2002 'Strany i
        Narody; proiskhozhdenie nazvanii' {{Countries and Peoples, Origins of
        Names}} believes that the following Rivers found their way into
        ethnonyms - Laba, Gavola, Spreva [Spree???], Ukra, Dolenitsa, Pena
        and Odra.

        THat's seven at least. Not to mention the Wislane, Slenzane and
        Buzhane

        > A net with holes that large is probably only going to catch
        dolphins -
        > or confuse the hell out of the cod... ;-)

        I seem to have caught you, my boy. What's it to be then? Codfish,
        or Dolphin? Or else opportunistic Seagull, cackling at the amateur
        Fisherman's efforts? ;o)

        > Modern historians recognise that 'Wend' is a synonym for 'Slav',
        > while 'Sorbs' are a specific group. It's really the same word
        > as 'Serb'.

        Naturally. Ageeva reports they call themselves Serby. She offers
        several elucidations of this name;
        - "person, clan member", cognates of which hypothetical word being
        Ukrainian priserbitisya, paserb, meaning join/adopt/unite/link etc.
        - something connected with Russian dialect serbat' = khlebat'
        nourish/wean etc, invoking milk kinship metaphors.
        - an old word refering to guardians of cattle, or pastoralists in
        general, nicely paralleling a supposed Iranian interpretation of
        Hrvat/Croat.

        Any comments on this?

        > > How else should we term these non Czech, non Lech,
        > > Western-Slovene?
        >
        > Using the assorted other tribal names that are known? Consider the
        > case of the Luchans of West Bohemia...

        I would if I could, but I don't know what you're talking about. Am I
        being dense and merely not getting a Czeshkophile/Bohemian-
        expansionist joke?!!?

        You don't disagree that a common term is needed for these extinct
        groups? Would you consider them closer to the Poles or the Czechs,
        or Kaszubs or whoever, I wonder?

        > The immediate caution would have to be... "beware the Pan-
        Slavist!";

        Slava, svyashennomy znamyu vseslavyanskizma! [urgh, grammatichka...]


        > > As their very name suggests, these latter lived on
        > > the Laba [Elbe, Albis],
        >
        > Er, no. As noted above, 'Polabian' is a label of geographical
        > convenience only. Roman Zaroff, for example, in his excellent (and
        > now classic) essay on the Germanisation of the Slavs - apparently
        > available online only at http://luzicane.h1.ru/RZaroff.html these
        > days - notes the division of the Polabian Slavs into the Obodrite,
        > Veleti and Sorbs.

        Alastair, I can't thank you enough for this link. Scholar and a
        Gentleman, so you are.

        And about the Polabs, I read somewhere that a group calling itself
        Polaben managed to hold on to their speech and identity into the
        Nineteenth Century, in the hinterland of Hamburg. A primer was
        published apparantly. Long out of date, no doubt, but does anyone
        know anything further about this little remnant?


        > > and so represent the westward
        > > push of the Slavs here, not the northern.
        >
        > This makes me uneasy, because of the implied assumption that the
        > Slavs were some kind of unified people when they turned up

        I would have thought that my choice of phrase there implied quite the
        opposite, as though we're dealing with a series of uncoordinated
        waves and ebbs.

        > in Bohemia (suggesting that, for example, there were two influxes
        of
        > culturally different Slavs some 2 centuries apart).

        Now that is curious. Does it link in with the supposed greater
        antiquity of such names as Khorvaty, Serby and Dudlebi? THe latter
        name interests me especially, given its occurence in the Ukraina
        also. Ageeva claims it as a Germanic borrowing of some kind.

        > Well the politics of the period was all about marriage alliances...
        > so most ruling families would have done the same. The Premyslids in
        > Bohemia certainly did.

        My point was that the smaller Houses would have been more likely to
        engage in this sort of practice with their more IMMEDIATE
        neighbours. Shouldn't there be a funny old Zapadnoslavyansky 'Z'
        after the 'R' in the Boehmischer dynasty's name, by the way?


        > Hope all this helps

        Muchly and mnogo. Spasibo bolshoe!
        Cheers,
        Ben
      • Rick Orli
        This is a great article, thanks! There was only one rather strange assertion, flipped out in the intro, that I have heard before: that the lands that had been
        Message 3 of 17 , Aug 4, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          This is a great article, thanks! There was only one rather strange
          assertion, flipped out in the intro, that I have heard before: that
          the lands that had been german were (nearly) deserted, before the
          slavs moved in.
          First, these were mostly gothic lands... I don't think the germans
          can quite claim the goths, not completly anyway. Second, the Idea
          that all this nice land was voluntarly emptied by anyone is most
          incredible. I can see some scenarios that would empty a land: no-
          mans land between two warring nations... like south carolina in the
          16th C., between north carolina and georgia warring nations. Or, a
          wipe out, like when the mongols passed through the kievian lands
          killing most, or a particularly brutal yet regional plague. What
          else? I think we can rule out a severe but temporary climate change
          since lands to either side seem unaffected. There could be a
          perceptive lapse - Roman-Italian rural lands always seemed empty to
          visitors because the population was unusually concentrated in cities-
          other lands seemed unpopulated to italians because the towns were
          tiny.
          Migrations usually involve only surplus populations, unless the
          migration is forced, militarily.

          essay on the Germanisation of the Slavs - apparently
          > > available online only at http://luzicane.h1.ru/RZaroff.html
          these
          > > days - notes the division of the Polabian Slavs into the
          Obodrite,
          > > Veleti and Sorbs.
        • Alastair Millar
          Rick writes... ... I think the point is that they had already been scoured by various other migrating tribes beforehand, meaning that settled (let alone
          Message 4 of 17 , Aug 6, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Rick writes...

            > There was only one rather strange
            > assertion... [snip]... that the lands
            > that had been german were (nearly)
            > deserted, before the slavs moved in.

            I think the point is that they had already been scoured by various other
            migrating tribes beforehand, meaning that settled (let alone semi-urbanised)
            life would have been extremely difficult.

            Certainly in Bohemia the Migration Period is an archaeological nightmare,
            with the disappearance of earlier material and then a whole jumble of
            not-easily-distinguishable stuff, and some semblance of order only coming
            with the arrival *and settlement* of the Slavs.

            Alastair

            -----------------------------------------------------
            Alastair Millar BSc (Hons) - http://www.skriptorium.info
            Translation & Consultancy for the Heritage Industry
            P.O. Box 11, CZ 413 01 Roudnice, Czech Republic
            Tel.: +420.607.993.041, Fax.: +420.416.832.090
          • Alastair Millar
            Ello Ben! ... Well I d use a good Czech ahoj but I probably wouldn t be able to resist adding sailor to the end... ... Good point! Never given it much
            Message 5 of 17 , Aug 6, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              'Ello Ben!

              > so you'll have to be contented with a
              > simple 'Hello' this time!

              Well I'd use a good Czech "ahoj" but I probably wouldn't be able to resist
              adding "sailor" to the end...

              > ethnonyms - Laba, Gavola, Spreva [Spree???], Ukra,
              > Dolenitsa, Pena and Odra.
              > THat's seven at least. Not to mention the Wislane,
              > Slenzane and Buzhane

              Good point! Never given it much thought previously.

              But to play devil's advocate... how many of those were applied to the groups
              BY THEMSELVES, and how many were applied to them from outside? And how many
              are *back* formations, where the river has taken its name from the people?

              > I seem to have caught you, my boy. What's it to be then?
              > Codfish, or Dolphin? Or else opportunistic Seagull,

              Albatross more like... appearing round the neck in the millstone tradition
              ;-)

              > cackling at the amateur Fisherman's efforts? ;o)

              Never that ;-)

              > Naturally. Ageeva reports they call themselves Serby.

              Or Srby, depending where they are.

              > Any comments on this?

              Nope. I tend to be quite skeptical about things like this because (a) we
              aren't sure just WHEN the word came into use, and (b) linguistics is a very
              very easy place for amateurs to come unstuck through seeing false
              connections and incorrect roots.

              > I would if I could, but I don't know what you're talking about.

              Well, to put it another way: why do we NEED a more distinct terminology than
              the triple (linguistics-based) division of the Slavs into Western, Southern
              and Eastern, which is nevertheless less specific than particular tribal
              names? If we apply a single term (like "Polabian Slav" we are immediately
              implying social and/or cultural affiliations that *uniquely* apply to the
              people so grouped... and can we really justify this?

              > Am I being dense and merely not getting a Czeshkophile/
              > Bohemian-expansionist joke?!!?

              The Luchans were a minor tribe believed to have occupied a small area of
              what is now West Bohemia. They are mentioned in the early chronicles, solely
              because the "real" Czechs beat them in a war.

              > You don't disagree that a common term is needed
              > for these extinct groups?

              I most certainly do disagree (see above).

              > Would you consider them closer to the Poles or
              > the Czechs, or Kaszubs or whoever, I wonder?

              Would I consider WHO closer? If you mean the Lusatian Sorbs, then I would go
              no further than to say that they were reasonably closely related -
              linguistically! - to the Poles and the Czechs. And let's not forget that the
              Sorbs themselves are subdivisible.

              > Slava, svyashennomy znamyu vseslavyanskizma! [urgh, grammatichka...]
              Urgh, Russian...
              *ducks & runs before Yana notices*

              > Alastair, I can't thank you enough for this link. Scholar
              > and a Gentleman, so you are.

              Well one out of two ain't bad. I'm not saying whcih, tho'!

              > Long out of date, no doubt, but does anyone
              > know anything further about this little remnant?

              Not me.

              > I would have thought that my choice of phrase
              > there implied quite the opposite, as though we're
              > dealing with a series of uncoordinated
              > waves and ebbs.

              Personally, I'd see the use "the Slavs" in your original statement as
              suggesting something else, but I can be a pedantic so-and-so ;-)

              > Now that is curious.

              Not really. If we accept that the movement of Slavic peoples was the last
              great act of the Migration Period, why should such an event have occurred
              only once when it had been preceded by numerous such events (Langobards,
              Franks etc.)

              > Does it link in with the supposed greater
              > antiquity of such names as Khorvaty, Serby

              I didn't know these names were of supposedly greater antiquity? What is the
              evidence for this?

              > and Dudlebi?

              Never heard of this one.Who/what is it?

              > My point was that the smaller Houses would
              > have been more likely to engage in this sort
              > of practice with their more IMMEDIATE
              > neighbours.

              Possibly. Depends how much they needed protection from an aggressive
              neighbour, or how strategically placed they were, I suspect.

              > Shouldn't there be a funny old Zapadnoslavyansky
              > 'Z' after the 'R' in the Boehmischer dynasty's name,
              > by the way?

              No. Correctly, one should write Premyslids in English, with a hook over the
              r. (This hook is correctly called a hac'ek in English - according to
              Chambers). Przemyslid is a horrible early/mid-20th century attempt to be
              cosmopolitan, and is very much avoided by translators today. (Trust me on
              this, in real life I am the leading translator of heritage and
              archaeological texts from Czech to English! ;-)).

              > Spasibo bolshoe!
              You're a ballet fan?

              Alastair

              -----------------------------------------------------
              Alastair Millar BSc (Hons) - http://www.skriptorium.info
              Translation & Consultancy for the Heritage Industry
              P.O. Box 11, CZ 413 01 Roudnice, Czech Republic
              Tel.: +420.607.993.041, Fax.: +420.416.832.090
            • Ben McGarr
              ... resist ... Well don t mind me! Would that be moryak in Czeski then? We have a very funny word in Russkiy, matros. Apparently it s through German from
              Message 6 of 17 , Aug 9, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, "Alastair Millar" <alastair@i...> wrote:
                > Well I'd use a good Czech "ahoj" but I probably wouldn't be able to
                resist
                > adding "sailor" to the end...

                Well don't mind me! Would that be moryak in Czeski then? We have a
                very funny word in Russkiy, matros. Apparently it's through German
                from French Matelot from an original Dutch maat-genoot, or 'mess-
                mate', comrade, bloke you eat with.

                > Good point! Never given it much thought previously.
                > But to play devil's advocate... how many of those were applied to
                the groups
                > BY THEMSELVES, and how many were applied to them from outside?

                Which outside? Germans wrote them down, but they're not German, nor
                are they some kind of scholarly Latin creation. The suffices are
                obviously Slavonic. Why would a German invader care to find out what
                the Poles and Czechs call the Wendish subunits? They'd all just be
                Wends to him anyway. They must be local names. Maybe they were
                applied by members of one unit to another, but that's very normal for
                ethnonyms. Most Welsh are quite happy to use this Germanic adjective
                to describe themselves.

                And, Helmond knew their language, and even saw fit to elaborate on
                how some groups had second names, or entered into broader overgroups,
                and he even tried to etymologise some. Wouldn't he have said if the
                names in general use were in some way incorrect, or at least had
                alternatives?

                Anyway, we were talking about geographic distribution, and I argued
                for the use of watersheds [and other geographical boundaries] as some
                kind of vague guide, so if a tribe is named after [or even named] the
                river then what does it matter if this name is external or not?

                >And how many
                > are *back* formations, where the river has taken its name from the
                people?

                The Odra and the Elbe at least already bore those names when the
                Germanics were sstill living there in Ptolemy's day, and I bet a fair
                few other streams have Germanic names. Dolenitsa at least looks
                Slavonic, but I'd bet 10 Rubles on the majority predating Adventus
                Sclavonum.

                > Albatross more like... appearing round the neck in the millstone
                tradition

                I made a joke about this the first time I tried to reply, butchering
                a few lines of Coleridge's finest. However, I have thought better of
                it and repent. "Wends, Wends everywhere, and not a drop to ....

                > Or Srby, depending where they are.

                Nu, da. But we're not talking about the Balkans.

                > Nope. I tend to be quite skeptical about things like this because
                (a) we
                > aren't sure just WHEN the word came into use, and (b) linguistics
                is a very
                > very easy place for amateurs to come unstuck through seeing false
                > connections and incorrect roots.

                We have the Byzantine Imperator/Historian's first witness of the
                word, and I wouldn't call Trubachev, Fasmer, Ilinskiy or Schuster-
                S<ews amateurs. With sound phonological understanding such
                hypothesising is valid, and, what's more, the people demand it.

                > Well, to put it another way: why do we NEED a more distinct
                terminology than
                > the triple (linguistics-based) division of the Slavs into Western,
                Southern
                > and Eastern, which is nevertheless less specific than particular
                tribal

                Is the period under discussion 600 - 900+ too early to suppose any
                divergence in speech? No. Do the Polaby-Obodrichy-Serby display a
                broad linguistic unity amongst themselves vis a vis Polska and
                Czeska? I believe so, though am open to argument here. I would
                specifically like to compare what was written by Johannes Schultze
                near Hannover in the Eighteenth Century, and modern Luzhitski.
                Having heard nothing to the contrary about the unity of the group,
                and having seen entries of its language in my Russian dictionary, I
                say they need a term to distinguish them.

                Anyway, outside of linguistics, we're dealing wiht a group of groups
                that had the same historical fate. Look at the chimaera that is the
                Scottish 'nation'. A right ethnosociolinguistic hodgepodge, but
                there is this element of common historical fate.

                > names? If we apply a single term (like "Polabian Slav" we are
                immediately
                > implying social and/or cultural affiliations that *uniquely* apply
                to the
                > people so grouped... and can we really justify this?

                I'd say that anyone with half an ounce of intellectual discernment
                [and I suspect anyone who has seen fit to join this Group falls into
                this category!] would see that such is not the intended implication.

                > The Luchans were a minor tribe believed to have occupied a small
                area of
                > what is now West Bohemia. They are mentioned in the early
                chronicles, solely
                > because the "real" Czechs beat them in a war.

                Where exactly were they? Can you say anything as to their name? I
                see the Sedlichane, Litomerzhitsy and Dechane, among others are named
                after their home territory.

                > no further than to say that they were reasonably closely related -
                > linguistically! - to the Poles and the Czechs. And let's not forget
                that the
                > Sorbs themselves are subdivisible.

                There must be rough indices of lexical correspondence and
                intelligibility [very high between almost all Slovene, but surely at
                different rates between different groups] to determine their relative
                distance from other Western Slavs.

                > Personally, I'd see the use "the Slavs" in your original statement
                as
                > suggesting something else, but I can be a pedantic so-and-so ;-)

                Bringing out the pedant in me; we often use the definite article when
                dealing with ethnic matters. The Spanish, or the French are sets of
                people differing far more widely by language and culture and
                anthropology than the Wends ever did, yet we happily employ the 'the'
                here. To escape the criticism that these have long political
                traditions, I often say 'the Finns' when discussing humans living
                from anywhere between Norway and the Urals. There's no question of
                there ever having been any cohesion between the Livs and the Komi,
                but we say the Finns all the same.

                > > Does it link in with the supposed greater
                > > antiquity of such names as Khorvaty, Serby
                >
                > I didn't know these names were of supposedly greater antiquity?
                What is the
                > evidence for this?

                There are morphological reasons, but perhaps more tellingly, each
                name here is recorded for at least two [and possibly all] out of the
                three main zones of Slavdom. The names therefore predate the
                migrations. Croats for instance were found independently in the
                Sudeten, Illyria, and the Volyn.


                > > and Dudlebi?
                >
                > Never heard of this one.Who/what is it?

                Likewise a tribal name encountered in areas very far apart. One set -
                Dudleb - by the Dnestr, another [which I'm surprised a man who knows
                the Luchane hasn't heard of] lived in the extreme south of your
                Chekhiya.

                There's supposedly a consensus on a Germanic origin for the name.
                *daud-laiba [nasledstvo umershego] being one reconstruction. Gothic
                is even supposed.

                > r. (This hook is correctly called a hac'ek in English - according to
                > Chambers). Przemyslid is a horrible early/mid-20th century attempt
                to be
                > cosmopolitan, and is very much avoided by translators today.

                Influence of Polish orthography? Lots of people can't do haceks on
                their computers. I always find diacritics a real pain in the
                zadnitsa myself - I'm always having to switch encoding. I've got
                used to the fact that O-umlaut is a Cyrillic Ts, and the E Acute
                shows up as a Russkiy I-igrik.

                S nailuchshimi pozhelaniyami,
                Ben
              • Alastair Millar
                ... (a) no, it would usually be namor nik (lit. one who is on the sea/ocean ). Alternatives might under certain circumstances include lodnik (lit. one on a
                Message 7 of 17 , Aug 11, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  Ben writes:

                  > Would that be moryak in Czeski then?

                  (a) no, it would usually be namor'nik (lit. 'one who is on the sea/ocean').
                  Alternatives might under certain circumstances include lodnik (lit. 'one on
                  a boat'), marin'ak (slang, lit. 'mariner'), or plavec (river sailor, lit.
                  'one who floats/swims').
                  (b) what is Czeski? In English the language is called Czech... and in Czech
                  we
                  call it c'esky jayzk informally or c'es'tina more correctly.

                  > Which outside?

                  Well we have convincing evidence for Germans, Jews, Arabs and Byzantine
                  Greeks in period. Later scholars have certainly applied names as well,
                  however.

                  > The suffices are obviously Slavonic.

                  To take Polabian, the -ian suffix is most certainly not Slavonic. It's not
                  related to the Slavonic -an or -c'an.

                  > Why would a German invader care to find out what
                  > the Poles and Czechs call the Wendish subunits? They'd all
                  > just be Wends to him anyway. They must be local names.

                  But that was my point. You were the one suggesting we need other 'group'
                  names for collections of tribes; personally, I don't agree that geographic
                  location should be the defining factor. This is not a subject I wish to
                  debate any further: accept that we are not going to agree on this, please.

                  > and I bet a fair few other streams have Germanic names.

                  And many others, like the Ohr'e in Bohemia (known to the Germans as the
                  Eger) are Celtic.

                  > Nu, da.

                  "Nuda" in Czech means "boredom"! :-(

                  > But we're not talking about the Balkans.

                  Aren't we?

                  > We have the Byzantine Imperator/Historian's
                  > first witness of the word,

                  Ouch. We also have a Byzantine Emperor's word for "Great Moravia", which
                  could have meant something very general indeed according to recent research.
                  Who says the Byzantine Emperor was working from primary sources or direct
                  knowledge?

                  > With sound phonological understanding such
                  > hypothesising is valid, and, what's more, the people
                  > demand it.

                  Well I agree, but the fact is that most people who try it are NOT experts,
                  so unless I see a convincing reference cited I default to natural/healthy
                  scepticism.

                  > Is the period under discussion 600 - 900+ too
                  > early to suppose any divergence in speech? No.

                  Agreed.

                  > Do the Polaby-Obodrichy-Serby display a
                  > broad linguistic unity amongst themselves vis a vis
                  > Polska and Czeska? I believe so, though am
                  > open to argument here.

                  I have no idea about the language of the Obdorites. Both flavours of
                  Sorbian, however, are *extremely* close to Czech and Polish. (I have read
                  Sorbian texts that are a lot closer to Czech than Slovak is, for instance).

                  You don't seem to have taken on board my earlier reference to Zaroff,
                  though - the Obdorites are a division of the 'Polabians' (a group defined
                  geographically and not necessarily culturally/linguistically), and the
                  latter are therefore not a separate tribe.

                  Where is this place called Czeska by the way? I assume you mean Bohemia,
                  known to the Czechs as C'echy. The Czech word "C'esko" (English translation:
                  Czechia) is a 1992 invention designed to abbreviate "C'eska republika"
                  (Czech Republic, i.e. Bohemia, Moravia and part of Silesia), and should not
                  therefore be applied when referring to any historical region.

                  > Having heard nothing to the contrary about the
                  > unity of the group, and having seen entries of its
                  > language in my Russian dictionary, I
                  > say they need a term to distinguish them.

                  They have one: "Polabian Slavs".

                  > Anyway, outside of linguistics, we're dealing
                  > wiht a group of groups that had the same
                  > historical fate.

                  I think that modern Sorbs would disagree with you there: they still exist,
                  for a start.

                  > I'd say that anyone with half an ounce of intellectual
                  > discernment [and I suspect anyone who has seen fit
                  > to join this Group falls into this category!] would see
                  > that such is not the intended implication.

                  I shall pretend not to be offended by that statement.

                  > Where exactly were they? Can you say anything as
                  > to their name?

                  They were allegedly around what is now the town of Z'atec in West Bohemia.
                  Previously this area, now called Z'atecko, was known as Lucko. A Luc'an is
                  one from Lucko.

                  For those with a further interest, I am proposing to submit a retelling of
                  the story of the war of the Czechs and Luc'ans for Slovo.

                  > I see the Sedlichane, Litomerzhitsy and Dechane, among others
                  > are named after their home territory.

                  (a) If you wish to be understood, you will have to stop making up spellings.
                  (b) To take these in order:
                  - the Sedlc'ane are "those living in farmstead families"
                  - the second are correctly the L'utmirici, "the people of L'utomir"
                  - the third are "the people of De'ka".

                  These are CLAN names, not tribal names: there is no evidence that their
                  language differed.

                  In all three cases, the clan names gave rise to the place names (presumably
                  clan centres - Sedlc'any, Litome'r'ice and De'c'in respectively), and not
                  the other way around.

                  Considering the baptism of the 14 Bohemian princes at Regensburg in 845 and
                  that the 9th century Geographus Bavarus states that the Czechs (Bohemians)
                  had 15 strongholds (civitates), it is interesting that these are considered
                  a SINGLE people, distinct from, for example, the Moravians and Poles. This
                  too implies that in Bohemia we are dealing with clan and not tribal names.
                  This is an essential distinction.

                  > There must be rough indices of lexical correspondence
                  > and intelligibility

                  I am sure that there are. We have to keep linguists off the streets
                  somehow...

                  > [very high between almost all Slovene,

                  I assume you mean Slavs here. Slovenes are distinct group in their own
                  right - their modern capital is Ljubljana.

                  > Bringing out the pedant in me; we often use the
                  > definite article when dealing with ethnic matters.

                  Define "we", please. And don't bother trying to lecture me on English usage.

                  >>> Does it link in with the supposed greater
                  >>> antiquity of such names as Khorvaty, Serby
                  >>
                  >> I didn't know these names were of supposedly
                  >> greater antiquity? What is the evidence for this?
                  >
                  > There are morphological reasons,

                  Well disregarding your invention of Khorvat for what everyone refers to as
                  Croats (or Charvats or Chorvats), this seems rather weak.

                  > but perhaps more tellingly, each name here is
                  > recorded for at least two [and possibly all] out of the
                  > three main zones of Slavdom. The names therefore
                  > predate the migrations.

                  Er no, because AFAIK there is no evidence for them in the written sources of
                  the
                  pre-immigration period. We have no evidence that they were indeed applied IN
                  PERIOD, however universal their application now.

                  > Croats for instance were found independently in the
                  > Sudeten, Illyria, and the Volyn.

                  The Sudetenland (if you wish to offend people) or the Sudety. "The Sudeten"
                  doesn't make sense. Also, I believe that you are not quite correct here:
                  Croats/Charvats are said to have occupied an area in what is now north-EAST
                  Bohemia,
                  just beyond the Sudetenland as usually defined, and away from the Sudety.
                  Charvat is still a common Czech surname.

                  >>> and Dudlebi?
                  >>>
                  >> Never heard of this one.Who/what is it?
                  >
                  > Likewise a tribal name [snip]
                  > [which I'm surprised a man who knows
                  > the Luchane hasn't heard of] lived in the
                  > extreme south of your Chekhiya.

                  Czechia is an artificial term coined in 1992 to refer to the Czech Republic
                  as a country (see above). Chekhiya is, I believe, a part of what is
                  generally called Chechyna.

                  Further, I have never claimed to possess encylopedic, or even complete,
                  information; I do however heartily endorse the cornerstone of the SIG, which
                  is to share what we know. I am quite happy to discuss anything provided that
                  we agree at the outset that there are at least two points of view, neither
                  of which need necessarily be correct.

                  > There's supposedly a consensus on a Germanic origin
                  > for the name. *daud-laiba [nasledstvo umershego]
                  > being one reconstruction. Gothic
                  > is even supposed.

                  Er, but one set was by the Dnestr? So why a Germanic origin, given your
                  earlier comments about the unlikelihood of German names being adopted into
                  Slavonic?

                  Anyway, having done a little digging, I have come up with Doudleby in South
                  Bohemia, which I assume is the place you are talking about. My trusty
                  'Zeme'pisna jmena v Cechach, na Morave' a ve Slezsku' ("Placenames in
                  Bohemia, Moravia & Silesia", by I. Lutterer & R. S'ramek, publ. TOBIAS,
                  Havlic'kuv Brod, 2004, ISBN 80-7311-025-3) notes that there is considerable
                  disagreement over the origin of the name.

                  Some authors see a link to a tribe known as the Dulebi or Dudlebi - with Al
                  Masudi suggesting Dulabe (!) in the 10th cent. - supposedly present in
                  Carinthia, Pannonia and Volynia as well as Bohemia. There is, and I quote,
                  "a rich literature on the origin of this tribal name, opinions thus far at
                  variance".

                  One suggestion is indeed a root in the west German Deudo- ('people, tribe,
                  land') and -laifs ('remnant, inheritance'), despite (quoting again) "its
                  weakness being the assumption that it must have been adopted from the
                  Germanic name into Slavonic prior to the shift in the Old High German
                  consonant, i.e. before 600 AD".

                  Others, perhaps not surprisingly, see a stronger connection to the common
                  Slavonic duda-, meaning reed or (pan) pipe...

                  >> Przemyslid is a horrible early/mid-20th century attempt
                  >> to be cosmopolitan, and is very much avoided by
                  >> translators today.
                  >
                  > Influence of Polish orthography?

                  Possibly. But now archaic if not positively obsolete for use in Czech.
                  Anyway, if a reader doesn't know how to pronounce r', how likely are they to
                  know the correct pronunciation of a Polish rz (which is not the same sound
                  anyway)?

                  > Lots of people can't do haceks on their computers.

                  No kidding? You will probably have noticed that due to the inability of
                  e-mail to handle full 8-bit characters, I usually adopt the US Dept. of
                  Defense (sic) standard, which is to indicate letters with a hac'ek by the
                  use of an apostrophe after that letter, and to skip the other accents. This
                  is the standard adopted on professional mailing lists for translators, for
                  example (one of the more successful of which for Czech I happen to run).

                  > S nailuchshimi pozhelaniyami,

                  S pozdravem, snad

                  Alastair

                  -----------------------------------------------------
                  Alastair Millar BSc (Hons) - http://www.skriptorium.info
                  Translation & Consultancy for the Heritage Industry
                  P.O. Box 11, CZ 413 01 Roudnice, Czech Republic
                  Tel.: +420.607.993.041, Fax.: +420.416.832.090
                • Ben McGarr
                  Zdrave Alastair! ... sea/ocean ). A funny abstract idea for the landlocked Czechs! I wonder do they make good sailors? Joseph Conrad seemed to manage it
                  Message 8 of 17 , Aug 11, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Zdrave Alastair!

                    --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, "Alastair Millar" <alastair@i...> wrote:
                    > (a) no, it would usually be namor'nik (lit. 'one who is on the
                    sea/ocean').

                    A funny abstract idea for the landlocked Czechs! I wonder do they
                    make good sailors? Joseph Conrad seemed to manage it despite being
                    born in Galich. And there's that Sorb polyarnik [polar explorer]
                    Leichhardt.

                    > (b) what is Czeski? In English the language is called Czech... and
                    in Czech
                    > we
                    > call it c'esky jayzk informally or c'es'tina more correctly.

                    Manc'estersky dialekt Vseslavjanskistic'eskogo yazyka, sorry!

                    > > Which outside?
                    >
                    > Well we have convincing evidence for Germans, Jews, Arabs and
                    Byzantine
                    > Greeks in period.

                    I doubt the latter three would have had much influence on the Germans
                    who recorded the majority of the tribal names of this region known to
                    us. What's the Jewish source if you please? I hadn't heard of this
                    before.

                    > > The suffices are obviously Slavonic.
                    > To take Polabian, the -ian suffix is most certainly not Slavonic.
                    It's not
                    > related to the Slavonic -an or -c'an.

                    Of course not, it's a modern word, originating in Anglophone media.
                    Germans would say Polaben, the Russkies Polaby, and the fellows
                    themselves - well, only Triglav knows! But it can't have been that
                    far from the Russkiy. The root is Polab and the prefix and the
                    metathesis of the River name are Very Slavonic.

                    > > Why would a German invader care to find out what
                    > > the Poles and Czechs call the Wendish subunits? They'd all
                    > > just be Wends to him anyway. They must be local names.
                    >
                    > But that was my point.

                    But he does care what the Wends themselves called them. Such
                    knowledge would be vital for the interpretation of Intelligence by
                    the Margraves in the face of possible uprisings, or in dealings with
                    the Slavonic elites.

                    >You were the one suggesting we need other 'group'
                    > names for collections of tribes; personally, I don't agree that
                    geographic
                    > location should be the defining factor. This is not a subject I
                    wish to
                    > debate any further: accept that we are not going to agree on this,
                    please.

                    Alright, but I'm just chatting, I have no real axe to grind for the
                    sake of these dead foreigners. >;o)

                    > > and I bet a fair few other streams have Germanic names.
                    > And many others, like the Ohr'e in Bohemia (known to the Germans as
                    the
                    > Eger) are Celtic.

                    Marvellous! Any details on that and any others? I'm Three Eighths
                    Bogtrotter myself, the remaining Five doubtless containing much
                    residual Briton, so I like to cast a winsome eye over our Celtic
                    Kin's former lands!

                    > "Nuda" in Czech means "boredom"! :-(

                    Nice. Is it some kind of slang? Looks like some kind of borrowing
                    from Romance. Ennui, nudity, words not often seen in the same
                    sentence...

                    > > We have the Byzantine Imperator/Historian's
                    > > first witness of the word,
                    >
                    > Ouch. We also have a Byzantine Emperor's word for "Great Moravia",
                    which
                    > could have meant something very general indeed according to recent
                    research.
                    > Who says the Byzantine Emperor was working from primary sources or
                    direct
                    > knowledge?

                    Conscientious chap though, heart in the right place, with an Empire's
                    resources at his academic disposal [enviable position!] and probably
                    sensitive to criticism from those in the know, and wishing to prove
                    himself a capable man of affairs. Be thankful he wrote anything at
                    all!

                    > > With sound phonological understanding such
                    > > hypothesising is valid, and, what's more, the people
                    > > demand it.
                    > Well I agree, but the fact is that most people who try it are NOT
                    experts,
                    > so unless I see a convincing reference cited I default to
                    natural/healthy
                    > scepticism.

                    Schuster-S'ewc H. 1985 Zur Geschichte und Etymologie des
                    ethnischen Namens Sorb / Serb / Sarb / Srb. Zeitschrift Slawistik
                    Bd.30, H6 S. 851-856.


                    > I have no idea about the language of the Obdorites. Both flavours of
                    > Sorbian, however, are *extremely* close to Czech and Polish. (I
                    have read
                    > Sorbian texts that are a lot closer to Czech than Slovak is, for
                    instance).

                    This is what I'm after. If only you had access to some older Polab
                    stuff to compare.

                    You know, I've noticed a peculiar thing out in Russia, and maybe you
                    have in That Place You Live In Which I Daren't Now Attempt To Spell.
                    As an outsider I can look at familiar Russian and compare it with
                    what I hear now and then of Polish [like today in that film 'Three
                    Colours; White'] or SerboCroat [in that Bosnian War film with the
                    bouncing mine] and be amazed at how similar still they all are, apart
                    from accent and a few phrases; and YET, Russians themselves will
                    obstinately insist they are not understanding any of it! I know I'm
                    being very superficial in my PanSlavic fervour but the Russians do
                    often act like that. Maybe it's a feature of Former Dominant
                    Nationalities?

                    > You don't seem to have taken on board my earlier reference to
                    Zaroff,
                    > though - the Obdorites are a division of the 'Polabians' (a group
                    defined
                    > geographically and not necessarily culturally/linguistically), and
                    the
                    > latter are therefore not a separate tribe.

                    I did! I just skipped my stubby little paws over the keyboard and
                    let the memory of the glorious Veleti slip into oblivion...

                    Zaroff reckons

                    "The names used to describe the Slavic inhabitants of these region is
                    a confusing issue due to lack of commonly accepted terminology.
                    Recently, it has become more common to call them Polabians or Polabs,
                    instead of Wends. There are also some problems with their division.
                    In the following work three large tribal groups are distinguished:
                    Obodrites in north-west, Veleti in north-east and Sorbs in the south
                    (for their distribution see Appendix 2)."

                    I interpret this as merely a means for readers to gain a mental
                    purchase on the peoples and territories under discussion, groupings
                    which coincidentally accord with the different manners of
                    Germanisation in different areas. I don't think he's implying any
                    fundamental ethnic or linguistic division.

                    In my Russkiy book it says of the Khizhane, Cherezpenyane, Dolenchane
                    and Ratary quoting Helmold's Slavic Chronicle that "These four tribes
                    for their bravoury are called Viltsy or Lyutichi." Any idea why
                    Veleti is spelt so strangely here? Lyutiy, for non Russkiys means
                    Ferocious, as in the epithet of our King Harold Godwinson's Daughter
                    Gytha's Great Grandson Mstislav Lyutiy of Kiev. Does Czech have the
                    word too?

                    > Where is this place called Czeska by the way? I assume you mean
                    Bohemia,
                    > known to the Czechs as C'echy. The Czech word "C'esko" (English
                    translation:
                    > Czechia) is a 1992 invention designed to abbreviate "C'eska
                    republika"
                    > (Czech Republic, i.e. Bohemia, Moravia and part of Silesia), and
                    should not
                    > therefore be applied when referring to any historical region.

                    Ponyal.

                    > > Anyway, outside of linguistics, we're dealing
                    > > wiht a group of groups that had the same
                    > > historical fate.
                    >
                    > I think that modern Sorbs would disagree with you there: they still
                    exist,
                    > for a start.

                    Barely! And yet German names, customs and dress are well entranched
                    among them.

                    > > I'd say that anyone with half an ounce of intellectual
                    > > discernment [and I suspect anyone who has seen fit
                    > > to join this Group falls into this category!] would see
                    > > that such is not the intended implication.
                    >
                    > I shall pretend not to be offended by that statement.

                    I'll pretend not to be surprised at the offence taken for none was
                    intended. You were talking about the need to be wary of using broad
                    brush language when dealing with complex past realities for fear some
                    will take statements on face value, and I feel that we can be over
                    careful here, as I know, and you know, and I know that you know, and
                    we both know that the vast majority of people reading this will know,
                    that things are like that in the human universe.

                    > For those with a further interest, I am proposing to submit a
                    retelling of
                    > the story of the war of the Czechs and Luc'ans for Slovo.

                    Lovely.

                    > > I see the Sedlichane, Litomerzhitsy and Dechane, among others
                    > > are named after their home territory.
                    > (a) If you wish to be understood, you will have to stop making up
                    spellings.

                    HEY! I'm just transliterating as best I can from Cyrillic! I try to
                    indicate pronunciation and if that galls a Czechophone reader then so
                    be it. I like to have a bit of fun now and then with the languages
                    and the influence of my Manc'esterskiy dialect of Russian
                    occasionally interferes with my English, I must admit, but we all
                    know the Roman alphabet is occasionally a rather hit and miss tool!

                    > (b) To take these in order:
                    > - the Sedlc'ane are "those living in farmstead families"

                    Sedlo being the ancestor to modern Russian Selo or village/hamlet.

                    > - the second are correctly the L'utmirici, "the people of L'utomir"

                    I know it's quite unrelated, but does anyone have any idea of the
                    meaning of the Lud element in German Ludwig? It's spelt Chlodowic by
                    the Franks too, so there's obviously nothing in common with our
                    Slavonic element, I'm just asking out of curiosity.

                    > - the third are "the people of De'ka".

                    Being a personal name? [Some of my Romanian nationalist friends
                    would have a field day on this 'Dacian' name - should I tell them in
                    the interests of mischief, or restrain myself and save mainstream
                    linguistics from yet more PseudoDacian headaches?]

                    > These are CLAN names, not tribal names: there is no evidence that
                    their
                    > language differed.

                    Accepted, but as a digression how much do we really know of clan
                    instituions in old Boii-home?

                    > > [very high between almost all Slovene,
                    >
                    > I assume you mean Slavs here. Slovenes are distinct group in their
                    own
                    > right - their modern capital is Ljubljana.

                    Lovely Laibach. I'm just using the reconstructed word that the first
                    Slavs used themselves. I didn't put an S on the end. Don't the
                    Slovenes call themselves Slovenci any way? I dislike the word Slav
                    myself, not enough syllables and annoying connotations.

                    Funny how a little group can just keep on calling themselves by the
                    name they always have done, while things elsewhere go their own way
                    until the day when someone comes along and tells them that their name
                    has a different official meaning now. Like the Rusyns, or the
                    speakers of Ladin in Switzerland.

                    Slovene as a title was also preserved by the Eastern Slavs around
                    Lake Il'men, and Lord Novgorod the Great. Has anyone else here
                    visited that area? I saw one of the most amazing sights of my life
                    on that lake, I'll tell yous about it another time if ye like.

                    I hear that the Kaszubs also bore a name Slovintsy too.

                    > > Bringing out the pedant in me; we often use the
                    > > definite article when dealing with ethnic matters.
                    > Define "we", please.

                    Ben McGarrs.

                    > Well disregarding your invention of Khorvat for what everyone
                    refers to as
                    > Croats (or Charvats or Chorvats),

                    Oh excuse me, I didn't know that all 200,000,000+ Russians,
                    Ukrainians and Belorussians had been disqualified from being counted
                    under the term 'everyone'.

                    >this seems rather weak.

                    Why? We can discern several layers of ethnonyms among the Slavs,
                    judging by function, source and formation principles and Khorvat is
                    included by some in the earlier strata. There's no obvious means of
                    breaking down XorBat into any constituent parts, and it makes little
                    sense if looked at in Slavonic isolation. I still stand by the logic
                    of the 'being in three separate places' subsequent to the Great
                    Migrations argument. How do you account for it otherwise?

                    I invoke in support of this perceived ancientness of name Ivanov,
                    V.V. & Toporov, V.N. 1980 O Drevnikh Slavyanskikh Etnonimakh. Kiev.
                    and Kovalev, G.F. 1991 Etnonimiya Slavyanskikh Yazykov. Voronezh.

                    > > but perhaps more tellingly, each name here is
                    > > recorded for at least two [and possibly all] out of the
                    > > three main zones of Slavdom. The names therefore
                    > > predate the migrations.
                    >
                    > Er no, because AFAIK there is no evidence for them in the written
                    sources of
                    > the
                    > pre-immigration period.

                    Bozhe! THere's no evidence for ANYTHING AT ALL pre-immigration. We
                    still have to find ways of explaining situations that were written
                    down.

                    >We have no evidence that they were indeed applied IN
                    > PERIOD, however universal their application now.

                    Where did they come from then?

                    > The Sudetenland (if you wish to offend people)

                    It wouldn't offend my FinnoGerman mate's Grandmother who was forcibly
                    evicted from there as a child!

                    >or the Sudety. "The Sudeten"
                    > doesn't make sense.

                    I have heard and read it. I'll try and think where.

                    >Also, I believe that you are not quite correct here:
                    > Croats/Charvats are said to have occupied an area in what is now
                    north-EAST
                    > Bohemia,
                    > just beyond the Sudetenland as usually defined, and away from the
                    Sudety.

                    Okay. I don't really know anything of Czech geography.

                    > Charvat is still a common Czech surname.

                    Superb!

                    > Czechia is an artificial term coined in 1992 to refer to the Czech
                    Republic
                    > as a country (see above). Chekhiya is, I believe, a part of what is
                    > generally called Chechyna.

                    Chekhiya is how the Russkies say Czechia. Do you mean Chechnya in
                    your last sentence? A place rather near the bottom of my To visit
                    when back in Russia list.

                    > Further, I have never claimed to possess encylopedic, or even
                    complete,
                    > information; I do however heartily endorse the cornerstone of the
                    SIG, which
                    > is to share what we know. I am quite happy to discuss anything
                    provided that
                    > we agree at the outset that there are at least two points of view,
                    neither
                    > of which need necessarily be correct.

                    For sure, but you do know some pretty obscure facts.

                    > > There's supposedly a consensus on a Germanic origin
                    > > for the name. *daud-laiba [nasledstvo umershego]
                    > > being one reconstruction. Gothic
                    > > is even supposed.
                    >
                    > Er, but one set was by the Dnestr? So why a Germanic origin, given
                    your
                    > earlier comments about the unlikelihood of German names being
                    adopted into
                    > Slavonic?

                    I didn't say it was unlikely that a Slavonic tribe should have a
                    Germanic title, merely that the specific names known from modern East
                    Germany don't look German. Germanics got about a fair bit before the
                    Slavs ever came on the scene, especially the "Glorious Goths" so it's
                    only natural that some echoes should be felt in a later period when
                    these lands had become Slavonicised.


                    > Anyway, having done a little digging, I have come up with Doudleby
                    in South
                    > Bohemia, which I assume is the place you are talking about. My
                    trusty
                    > 'Zeme'pisna jmena v Cechach, na Morave' a ve Slezsku' ("Placenames
                    in
                    > Bohemia, Moravia & Silesia", by I. Lutterer & R. S'ramek, publ.
                    TOBIAS,
                    > Havlic'kuv Brod, 2004, ISBN 80-7311-025-3) notes that there is
                    considerable
                    > disagreement over the origin of the name.
                    > Some authors see a link to a tribe known as the Dulebi or Dudlebi -
                    with Al
                    > Masudi suggesting Dulabe (!)

                    French aristos! Maybe the Arabic alphabet's lack of vowels is the
                    problem here.

                    >in the 10th cent. - supposedly present in
                    > Carinthia, Pannonia and Volynia as well as Bohemia. There is, and I
                    quote,
                    > "a rich literature on the origin of this tribal name, opinions thus
                    far at
                    > variance".
                    > One suggestion is indeed a root in the west German Deudo- ('people,
                    tribe,
                    > land') and -laifs ('remnant, inheritance'), despite (quoting
                    again) "its
                    > weakness being the assumption that it must have been adopted from
                    the
                    > Germanic name into Slavonic prior to the shift in the Old High
                    German
                    > consonant, i.e. before 600 AD".

                    THat's not so much a weakness if we suppose an Eastern Germanic
                    source, as in the Gothic Daud-laiba.

                    Has anyone considered a Celtic etymology? The same IE root gives
                    Tuath in Irish, the Gaulish God Teutates, and gave another word in
                    Old Welsh which is now obsolete but which gave the first part of the
                    rather well known name 'Tudor'. [Funny how Tudor means exactly the
                    same as Englisc Theodric and Gothic Theodoric, and the Deutsch name
                    Volker and Dietrich, and the very word Deutsch itself]. The same
                    Celtic root is sometimes supposed to underly the name of the Germanic
                    tribe Teutones, so Douleby wouldn't be alone if regarded as a Celtic
                    borrowing.

                    There were plenty of Celts around in the area, and who knows into
                    what divergent forms their language developed once they slipped from
                    the notice of Classical chroniclers into the mists of the endless
                    wanderings of folks.

                    > Others, perhaps not surprisingly, see a stronger connection to the
                    common
                    > Slavonic duda-, meaning reed or (pan) pipe...

                    Doesn't ring true on the face of it, but there's nowt so queer as
                    folk so who knows. I would say though, that I wouldn't expect so
                    many reeds or marshes in the mountainous areas concerned. What's
                    the -leby bit if the first part is fife?

                    > > Lots of people can't do haceks on their computers.
                    >
                    > No kidding? You will probably have noticed that due to the
                    inability of
                    > e-mail to handle full 8-bit characters, I usually adopt the US
                    Dept. of
                    > Defense (sic) standard, which is to indicate letters with a hac'ek
                    by the
                    > use of an apostrophe after that letter, and to skip the other
                    accents. This
                    > is the standard adopted on professional mailing lists for
                    translators, for
                    > example (one of the more successful of which for Czech I happen to
                    run).

                    Awkward for me, I use apostrophes to indicate the Cyrillic soft sign,
                    and two apostrophes for the hard sign. In welsh they have the 'ty
                    bach' ['little house'] sign like a French circumflex accent, and the
                    Welsh convention is to use a + sign; maybe that would have been a
                    better choice for the Pentagon. Or else the '>' or '<'. I wonder
                    what the Frenchies do? In practice the Welsh usually just miss it
                    out on the web. Too ugly. Jonny Foreigner should consider adopting
                    a purely phonetic and simplified orthography, just like in
                    English. ;o))

                    By the bye, it's the 12th of Avgust, so Happy Beating-Of-The-Apostles-
                    Saints-Paul-And-Silas Day!
                    http://www.days.ru/Images/im1097.htm

                    All the Bestest,
                    Ben
                  • Ben McGarr
                    Hi everyone, I ve just posted a map I d found deep at the bottom of my hard drive showing the tribes me and Alastair have been talking about, if you d like to
                    Message 9 of 17 , Aug 11, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi everyone,

                      I've just posted a map I'd found deep at the bottom of my hard drive
                      showing the tribes me and Alastair have been talking about, if you'd
                      like to see.

                      Its in the Files section at the group's webssite under the name
                      Karte2.

                      All the Best
                      Ben
                    • Alastair Millar
                      Ben writes... ... Ah well done, that s the one that vanished off my own hard drive! I still don t agree with its designation of Polaben as a single and
                      Message 10 of 17 , Aug 13, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Ben writes...
                        > I've just posted a map... [snip]

                        Ah well done, that's the one that vanished off my own hard drive!

                        I still don't agree with its designation of "Polaben" as a single and
                        distinct group tho'!

                        Alastair
                      • Alastair Millar
                        Ben writes... ... Naaah. There s this litle river called the Elbe that leads straight down to the sea, navigable since the late 18th century IIRC (and
                        Message 11 of 17 , Aug 13, 2004
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Ben writes...

                          > A funny abstract idea for the landlocked Czechs!

                          Naaah. There's this litle river called the Elbe that leads straight down to
                          the sea, navigable since the late 18th century IIRC (and certainly since the
                          19th).

                          > I wonder do they make good sailors?
                          Apparently so, strangely enough. The nationalised maritime fleet was quite
                          successful until Viktor 'the Pirate of Prague' Kozeny bought it after the
                          Velvet Revolution and sold it off in bits to make a profit.

                          > Manc'estersky dialekt Vseslavjanskistic'eskogo yazyka, sorry!

                          Bah. Pan-slavism. Grmbl.

                          > What's the Jewish source if you please? I hadn't
                          > heard of this before.

                          Well for a start we have Ibrahim ibn Ya'qub at-Turtushi, who in the mid-10th
                          century
                          travelled down from Pomerania to Magdeburg and thence to Prague, before
                          going home to Spain via Fulda and the Rhineland.

                          > But it can't have been that far from the Russkiy.

                          Why this fixation with Russian? There is a nasty habit among pan-Slavists in
                          particular of ascribing some sort of "elder brother"-like seniority or
                          superiority to the Russians... need I point out that the first Slavic
                          proto-state was actually in Moravia, however?

                          > But he does care what the Wends themselves
                          > called them. Such knowledge would be vital
                          > for the interpretation of Intelligence by
                          > the Margraves in the face of possible
                          > uprisings, or in dealings with the Slavonic elites.

                          Ummmm... actually, his assorted retainers might be interested, but he
                          himself probably wouldn't be. Which is why the few written records we have
                          tend to refer to Wends en bloc. (I could also suggest that your
                          interpretation of "intelligence" is far too modern...)

                          > Alright, but I'm just chatting, I have no real axe to grind
                          > for the sake of these dead foreigners. >;o)

                          No comment.

                          > Marvellous! Any details on that and any others?

                          I think there are books available on this. There is certainly one in Czech,
                          by Jir'i Svoboda, on Celtic place-names in Bohemia - I know because I
                          translated the English summary for it. I'll dig it out at some point (I'm in
                          the process of relocating my workplace, so a lot of things are in boxes at
                          the moment).

                          > > "Nuda" in Czech means "boredom"! :-(
                          > Nice. Is it some kind of slang?

                          Nope.

                          > Conscientious chap though, heart in the right place,
                          > with an Empire's resources at his academic disposal
                          > [enviable position!]

                          Well yes, IF he had time to use them rather than just delegating a slave to
                          do the research for him. Isn't this how many modern university academics
                          work, too??? Oh wait, those half-starved creatures are post-grad.
                          students...

                          > and probably sensitive to criticism from those in the know

                          ... who will have their own agendas and who will filter the information
                          reaching his ears/eyes accordingly.

                          > and wishing to prove himself a capable man of affairs.

                          ... while those around him want to see him fall on his face, metaphorically
                          speaking.

                          > Be thankful he wrote anything at all!


                          Oh I am, I just think we need to take it in context and keep our minds open,
                          rather than accepting everything as being the literal truth simply because
                          it's written down...

                          > Schuster-S'ewc H. 1985 Zur Geschichte und Etymologie des
                          > ethnischen Namens Sorb / Serb / Sarb / Srb. Zeitschrift Slawistik
                          > Bd.30, H6 S. 851-856.

                          See? I *knew* that if I kept on at you you'd start sourcing your comments!

                          > This is what I'm after. If only you had access to
                          > some older Polab stuff to compare.

                          Well there ARE whole Polabian websites out there, ya know. Google for them!
                          (For some reason some of them keep e-mailing me newsflashes about their
                          struggle for self-identity/determination...)

                          > and YET, Russians themselves will obstinately
                          > insist they are not understanding any of it!

                          Oh I think I have to let Alex answer that one... you still out there
                          somewhere Alex???? *grin*

                          > I interpret this as merely a means for readers to
                          > gain a mental purchase on the peoples... [snip]
                          > I don't think he's implying any
                          > fundamental ethnic or linguistic division.

                          My point PRECISELY - it's a convenient geographic label, nothing more.

                          > Any idea why Veleti is spelt so strangely here?

                          Nope.

                          > Does Czech have the word too?

                          Nope.

                          > HEY! I'm just transliterating as best I can from Cyrillic!

                          Yes but why not use acceptable English words where they exist? Words like
                          "Czech" aren't THAT hard to spell, ya know...

                          > > - the third are "the people of De'ka".
                          > Being a personal name?

                          Apparently. Don't forget the hook over the "e", so it's pronounced Dyeka.

                          > Accepted, but as a digression how much do we
                          > really know of clan instituions in old Boii-home?

                          Absolutely nothing. That doesn't mean we shouldn't recognise them as having
                          existed, though.

                          Part of the problem for non- or limited-Czech speakers is undoubtedly the
                          Czech word "kmen", which can mean tribe OR race OR people OR group... the
                          situation is so bad that contemporary Czech historians now use the Latin
                          'gens' for 'tribe', to prevent confusion.

                          > Lovely Laibach. I'm just using the reconstructed
                          > word that the first Slavs used themselves.

                          Errrrrrrrrrrr... surely they would have used Slovan or something similar,
                          rather than Slovene?

                          > Don't the Slovenes call themselves Slovenci any way?

                          Slovaci, as far as I know... which is also what Slovaks call themselves. Oh
                          yes, and both refer to their country as "Slovensko" I believe...

                          > I dislike the word Slav myself, not enough syllables and annoying
                          connotations.

                          Nah. Perfectly good word, and doesn't waste ink. And it's got ONE vowel,
                          which is more than a lot of Czech words do... As long as you remember that
                          in linguistics the adjective is Slavonic, and everywhere else it's Slavic,
                          you're okay.

                          > Slovene as a title was also preserved by the
                          > Eastern Slavs around Lake Il'men, and Lord
                          > Novgorod the Great.

                          See above. Slovene is not a Slavonic word.

                          > Oh excuse me, I didn't know that all 200,000,000+
                          > Russians, Ukrainians and Belorussians had been
                          > disqualified from being counted under the term 'everyone'.

                          As noted above, if a perfectly good/acceptable English word exists, why not
                          use it, since we're writing in English?

                          > How do you account for it otherwise?

                          I don't, I'm trying (successfully) to get you to explain your ideas more
                          fully, so that everyone can follow them.

                          > I invoke in support of this perceived ancientness of name
                          > Ivanov, V.V. & Toporov, V.N. 1980 O Drevnikh
                          > Slavyanskikh Etnonimakh. Kiev. and Kovalev, G.F.
                          > 1991 Etnonimiya Slavyanskikh Yazykov. Voronezh.

                          See? more sources, it works!

                          > Bozhe! THere's no evidence for ANYTHING
                          > AT ALL pre-immigration.

                          Archaeology. It's a thing of the past, but still... you could dig it if you
                          tried.

                          > Where did they come from then?

                          Dontcha love a mystery?

                          > > The Sudetenland (if you wish to offend people)
                          > It wouldn't offend my FinnoGerman mate's Grandmother

                          Using the German name among Czechs, however, will almost certainly offend.

                          > Chekhiya is how the Russkies say Czechia.

                          Again, why make up a word when an English one already exists?

                          > Do you mean Chechnya in your last sentence?

                          Dat's da bunny!

                          > For sure, but you do know some pretty obscure facts.

                          Not really. Some of them can be quite hard to get to for non-Czech speakers,
                          admittedly.

                          > French aristos! Maybe the Arabic alphabet's lack
                          > of vowels is the problem here.

                          The a has a hat on it, for what it's worth.

                          > THat's not so much a weakness if we suppose an
                          > Eastern Germanic source, as in the Gothic Daud-laiba.

                          I feel no need to make that assumption without further evidence. Besides,
                          the Goths only started moving in what, the 200's AD? A mere 250 years or so
                          before the Slavs started appearing, not much time to set a standard, I feel.

                          > There were plenty of Celts around in the area,
                          > and who knows into what divergent forms their
                          > language developed

                          P-Celtic and Q-Celtic, as I recall.

                          > once they slipped from the notice of Classical
                          > chroniclers into the mists of the endless
                          > wanderings of folks.

                          That closet romaticism of yours is showing again.

                          > Jonny Foreigner should consider adopting a purely
                          > phonetic and simplified orthography, just like in
                          > English. ;o))

                          But Czech DOES have a purely phonetic, regular system of
                          spelling/pronunciation already.

                          Cheers

                          Alastair

                          -----------------------------------------------------
                          Alastair Millar BSc (Hons) - http://www.skriptorium.info
                          Translation & Consultancy for the Heritage Industry
                          P.O. Box 11, CZ 413 01 Roudnice, Czech Republic
                          Tel.: +420.607.993.041, Fax.: +420.416.832.090
                        • Ben McGarr
                          Hello Alastair, I ve just got back from a fortnight on the Isle of Skye, but I still thought I d reply to a few points you made last time we spoke. ...
                          Message 12 of 17 , Aug 30, 2004
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hello Alastair,
                            I've just got back from a fortnight on the Isle of Skye, but I still
                            thought I'd reply to a few points you made last time we spoke.

                            --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, "Alastair Millar" <alastair@i...> wrote:

                            > Why this fixation with Russian? There is a nasty habit among pan-
                            Slavists in
                            > particular of ascribing some sort of "elder brother"-like seniority
                            or
                            > superiority to the Russians... need I point out that the first
                            Slavic
                            > proto-state was actually in Moravia, however?

                            My fixation with Russian comes merely from the fact that I have lived
                            ate, worked and slept with them for several years. I don't see them
                            as any sort of 'elder brother' or anything, it's just that through
                            this 'brother' I met the rest of the 'family'. Lots of my Russkiy
                            friends like to use this 'State-builder' kind of terminology, but I
                            don't, having a different view of what makes a people great,
                            something bundled up in their ability to preserve a sense of
                            themselves over vast spans of time and other cultural factors.


                            > > Lovely Laibach. I'm just using the reconstructed
                            > > word that the first Slavs used themselves.
                            >
                            > Errrrrrrrrrrr... surely they would have used Slovan or something
                            similar,
                            > rather than Slovene?

                            That's how I've seen it in etymological dictionaries. There isn't
                            any online dictionaries you can point me to in which this is refuted,
                            is there?

                            > > Don't the Slovenes call themselves Slovenci any way?
                            >
                            > Slovaci, as far as I know... which is also what Slovaks call
                            themselves.

                            I read that only the Slovaks use that term.

                            > > Slovene as a title was also preserved by the
                            > > Eastern Slavs around Lake Il'men, and Lord
                            > > Novgorod the Great.
                            >
                            > See above. Slovene is not a Slavonic word.

                            I don't follow you here. What is the word if it's not Slavonic?


                            > > Oh excuse me, I didn't know that all 200,000,000+
                            > > Russians, Ukrainians and Belorussians had been
                            > > disqualified from being counted under the term 'everyone'.
                            >
                            > As noted above, if a perfectly good/acceptable English word exists,
                            why not
                            > use it, since we're writing in English?

                            We are talking about ethnic realities a millenium in the past, when
                            these 'Croats' were called Khorvaty in the Russian chronicles. The
                            English term Croat is used now to name people who live between Bosnia
                            and Slovenia [despite their own ideas on what they are called] so I
                            don't see how it's a better term than Khorvat to describe people on
                            the Dnestr in the 1000s. Your Charvat or whatever is hardly a good
                            term to use for people who lived in the modern Ukraine, being a Czech
                            form of the original.

                            > > Bozhe! THere's no evidence for ANYTHING
                            > > AT ALL pre-immigration.
                            >
                            > Archaeology. It's a thing of the past, but still... you could dig
                            it if you
                            > tried.

                            I've got a degree in it, but I look to Philology as much these days.

                            > > THat's not so much a weakness if we suppose an
                            > > Eastern Germanic source, as in the Gothic Daud-laiba.
                            >
                            > I feel no need to make that assumption without further evidence.
                            Besides,
                            > the Goths only started moving in what, the 200's AD? A mere 250
                            years or so
                            > before the Slavs started appearing, not much time to set a
                            standard, I feel.

                            The movement of which you speak was from the Pontic area to the Roman
                            limes. They [or a core of their predecessors or whatnot] had a
                            previous homeland nearer the Baltic. I said Eastern Germanic anyway
                            which includes all those Burgundians and Vandals and Gepids too, and
                            some of these fellows were around before the Roman Empire, more than
                            enough time to make an impression on any Proto Slavs that may have
                            fallen into their orbit.

                            > > There were plenty of Celts around in the area,
                            > > and who knows into what divergent forms their
                            > > language developed
                            >
                            > P-Celtic and Q-Celtic, as I recall.

                            We are only dealing with P Celts at this time in this part of the
                            Continent. The Q lot are only known from Ireland and perhaps
                            northern Iberia. I was talking about the possibility of a unique
                            development of Celtic speech in the centre of Europe where it may
                            have lingered on after its period of political dominance there. I
                            wonder does the bok for which you translated the prefix dare to make
                            any suppositions on the presence of any peculiar developments in
                            phonology in your region?

                            > > once they slipped from the notice of Classical
                            > > chroniclers into the mists of the endless
                            > > wanderings of folks.
                            >
                            > That closet romaticism of yours is showing again.

                            Oh and so what? That sentence can easily be dried to its bare husk,
                            but should it really have to be? Let me play Alastair! It hardly
                            harms the bulk of what I was saying last time. And since when has my
                            Romanticism been hidden in a closet?!!

                            > > Jonny Foreigner should consider adopting a purely
                            > > phonetic and simplified orthography, just like in
                            > > English. ;o))
                            >
                            > But Czech DOES have a purely phonetic, regular system of
                            > spelling/pronunciation already.

                            I know. What I said was obviously a joke, as evinced by the tacky
                            little smiley following it, the absurd assertion that English has a
                            decent phonetic orthography, and the use of old fashioned stereotypic
                            epithets like Jonnie Foreigner.

                            T'rah for now,
                            Ben
                          • Alastair Millar
                            ... *shrug* I ve never come across it. ... Nope. ... At some point I shall ask my Slovene friends again. ... The root is Slavonic, but Slovene is not a
                            Message 13 of 17 , Sep 3, 2004
                            • 0 Attachment
                              >> Errrrrrrrrrrr... surely they would have used Slovan or
                              >> something similar, rather than Slovene?
                              > That's how I've seen it in etymological dictionaries.

                              *shrug* I've never come across it.

                              > There isn't any online dictionaries you can point
                              > me to in which this is refuted, is there?

                              Nope.

                              >> Slovaci, as far as I know... which is also what
                              >> Slovaks call themselves.
                              >
                              > I read that only the Slovaks use that term.

                              At some point I shall ask my Slovene friends again.

                              >> See above. Slovene is not a Slavonic word.
                              > I don't follow you here. What is the word if it's not Slavonic?

                              The root is Slavonic, but Slovene is not a Slavonic word afaik.

                              >> As noted above, if a perfectly good/acceptable
                              >> English word exists, why not use it, since we're writing
                              >> in English?
                              >
                              > We are talking about ethnic realities a millenium in
                              > the past, when these 'Croats' were called Khorvaty
                              > in the Russian chronicles.

                              Do try not to patronise, it really doesn't help your argument.

                              > The English term Croat is used now to name people
                              > who live between Bosnia and Slovenia [snip]

                              But not to refer *exclusively* to them - it's also used for those who used
                              to live in, for example, North-East Bohemia, and indeed those on the Dnestr
                              in the 1000's - that's my point.

                              > so I don't see how it's a better term than Khorvat
                              > to describe people on the Dnestr in the 1000s.

                              It is better because it is the accepted English word for that group. If you
                              use something else, you will end up looking either (a) so pretentious that
                              your original points are lost, (b) stubborn and/or (c) uninformed.

                              > Your Charvat or whatever is hardly a good
                              > term to use for people who lived in the modern
                              > Ukraine, being a Czech form of the original.

                              I never suggested using Charvat - and indeed I would not, since we have a
                              perfectly good English word already.... see above.

                              >> Archaeology. It's a thing of the past, but still... you
                              >> could dig it if you tried.
                              >
                              > I've got a degree in it,

                              That makes at least three of us on the list, then.

                              > but I look to Philology as much these days.

                              Ah, an apostate from the True Path...

                              > The movement of which you speak was from the
                              > Pontic area to the Roman limes. They [or a core
                              > of their predecessors or whatnot] had a
                              > previous homeland nearer the Baltic.
                              [snip]
                              > I said Eastern Germanic anyway which includes
                              > all those Burgundians and Vandals and Gepids too,
                              > and some of these fellows were around before the
                              > Roman Empire, more than enough time to make
                              > an impression on any Proto Slavs that may have
                              > fallen into their orbit.

                              Well (a) I still reserve judgement until seeing more evidence, and (b) there
                              is no evidence that were any proto-Slavs around TO influence prior to the
                              5th or 6th centuries.

                              > We are only dealing with P Celts at this time
                              > in this part of the Continent. The Q lot are
                              > only known from Ireland and perhaps
                              > northern Iberia.

                              I am aware of that. The point I was trying to make is that these are the
                              ONLY major flavours of Celtic that we know - and specifically, that we do
                              not have any evidence at all for your Central European version.

                              > I was talking about the possibility of a unique
                              > development of Celtic speech in the centre of
                              > Europe where it may have lingered on [snip]

                              How nice. And is there any actual evidence for this? Bearing in mind the
                              generally accepted view that any lingering Celts were either wiped out or
                              well and truly assimilated after the arrival of the Slavs?

                              > wonder does the bok for which you translated
                              > the prefix dare to make any suppositions on the
                              > presence of any peculiar developments in
                              > phonology in your region?

                              It is not supposition, it is observation of Celtic elements in some place
                              names. It also does not suggest peculiar developments in local phonology,
                              and I did not say that it did so.

                              Even if it did, though, surely this is just the sort of thing you should be
                              in favour of if you want to find any evidence to back up your 'third way' of
                              Celtic linguistic development in Central Europe? Either you think there were
                              phonological developments in the region or you don't, make your mind up.

                              > Oh and so what? [snip]
                              > Let me play Alastair! [snip]
                              > And since when has my Romanticism been
                              > hidden in a closet?!!

                              Which of course is the nub of this discussion anyway, and I'm glad you've
                              finally come out and said it. You may be here just to play around and wander
                              off down some wild hypotheses that are very difficult to support, but some
                              of us prefer to share information which can actually be substantiated, and
                              which can feed into the practicalities of (historical) reconstruction....
                              which is what this list is about.

                              Given the foregoing, pressure of work and an almost total disinterest in
                              linguistics, I see no point in pursuing this thread any further

                              Alastair

                              -----------------------------------------------------
                              Alastair Millar BSc (Hons) - http://www.skriptorium.info
                              Translation & Consultancy for the Heritage Industry
                              P.O. Box 11, CZ 413 01 Roudnice, Czech Republic
                              Tel.: +420.607.993.041, Fax.: +420.416.832.090
                            • Ben McGarr
                              ... Does that mean you ve never looked? If so, I don t see why you can get away with such a long Errrrrrrrrrrrr [as the actress said to the bishop]. ... Ruf
                              Message 14 of 17 , Sep 3, 2004
                              • 0 Attachment
                                In sig@yahoogroups.com, "Alastair Millar" <alastair@i...> wrote:
                                > >> Errrrrrrrrrrr... surely they would have used Slovan or
                                > >> something similar, rather than Slovene?
                                > > That's how I've seen it in etymological dictionaries.
                                > *shrug* I've never come across it.

                                Does that mean you've never looked? If so, I don't see why you can
                                get away with such a long "Errrrrrrrrrrrr" [as the actress said to
                                the bishop].

                                > > I read that only the Slovaks use that term.
                                > At some point I shall ask my Slovene friends again.

                                Ruf Ageeva says they should be "Sloventsy" or however their peculiar
                                orthography attempts to get across something on those lines. She
                                reserves Slovaci as an autonym for the Slovaks, and Slovintsi for the
                                Kaszub/Pomeranians of NW Polska.

                                > The root is Slavonic, but Slovene is not a Slavonic word afaik.

                                When it's pronounced Slow - Veen to signify those chaps in Illyria
                                it's just an English thing, but if it's something more like slo veh
                                nye then it's Slavonic, surely?

                                This is what the Novgorod people called themselves before the
                                Scandinavian descended aristos and the Orthodox clergy got em to
                                recognise emselves as Rusichi. How can it not be Slavonic in this
                                case?

                                Incidentally, does anyone have any idea why there are two forms of
                                this word in Russkiy? Slovene and Slavyane. Is the latter
                                an 'educated' form owing its different shape to OLd Church Slavonic,
                                I wonder?

                                > > We are talking about ethnic realities a millenium in
                                > > the past, when these 'Croats' were called Khorvaty
                                > > in the Russian chronicles.
                                >
                                > Do try not to patronise, it really doesn't help your argument.

                                Where's the patronising there? I'm just trying to spell things out
                                a bit. You did accuse me a while back of being too obscure at
                                times. Christ, I can't win, can I?! All I'm saying is that I think
                                the Russian convention for naming this long dead polity is better
                                than what you say is the English. You even said I had made up my
                                word, which is rather ridiculous as it's there in the letopisy. I
                                suppose we could compromise with a more specific "White Croats".
                                Does that mean the Balkan and the Central European ones were Black
                                Croats or something? Is there any colour terminology seen for the
                                Slavs in your ppart of the world?

                                On a personal note, perhaps I am guilty of an unusual desire to use,
                                or at least promote knowledge of, the names of folks as they call [or
                                called] themselves, but I see that as something quite honourable.
                                Isn't this exactly the sort of way of speaking we should be employing
                                on this list? After all, we're not in Academia here, and should be
                                allowed the freedom to relax a bit.

                                > It is better because it is the accepted English word for that
                                group. If you
                                > use something else, you will end up looking either (a) so
                                pretentious that
                                > your original points are lost, (b) stubborn and/or (c) uninformed.

                                No (d)? Mercy!

                                > I never suggested using Charvat - and indeed I would not, since we
                                have a
                                > perfectly good English word already.... see above.

                                But you did throw 'Charvat' at me as though to prove my ignorance and
                                inability to spell, despite Khorvat being the normal Russian form,
                                dating from the time it was used in the mouths of people whom it
                                referred to.

                                Indeed, I'm very happy to learn how the Czechs call their Croats, and
                                especially that the word survives as a surname, but I'd prefer it if
                                you introduced such things to me as curious additional facts rather
                                than as absolute replacements for my own supposed falsities. And you
                                must admit how clumsy the accepted English words are. No doubt
                                they'll change in years to come as fashions change, so forgive me a
                                little innovation.

                                > > but I look to Philology as much these days.
                                >
                                > Ah, an apostate from the True Path...

                                I'd love to see a true working synthesis of Archaeology with
                                Philology, Genetics, Physical and Social Anthropology, and even with
                                a more developed scientific approach to Folklore, Dance, Musicology
                                and anything else that could possibly help in untangling the great
                                story of humanity and culture. That would be a True Path! Can't see
                                it happening in our lifetimes though. I'd blame this on the present
                                state of academia in general, and especially on theory and
                                interdisciplinary jealousy. Or perhaps the present state of our
                                knowledge necessarily precludes it.

                                You just don't see the wide-ranging scholars of the past any more.
                                Where are the J.G. Frazers of today? Our education systems simply
                                cannot produce their ilk any more, to our great loss. THey were men
                                of their time naturally, and politically would hardly be very
                                fashionable now, or even acceptable, but if they or others of their
                                outlook and ambition were in possession of one half the data
                                available to us today, they'd be fifty years ahead of us in their
                                concclusions.

                                I suppose Renfrew is trying his best to go some way toward this, I
                                wonder what you think of his Indo European hypothesis? I am very
                                scathing of it myself!

                                {concerning the Dudlebi deriving their name from Gothic or somesuch}
                                > Well (a) I still reserve judgement until seeing more evidence,

                                I believe there never will be any more evidence of any relevance to
                                this question, so I reckon that we should try our damnedest to do
                                what we can with what we have, rather than throw our arms up in the
                                air in despair.

                                >and (b) there
                                > is no evidence that were any proto-Slavs around TO influence prior
                                to the
                                > 5th or 6th centuries.

                                Slavonic split from Baltic LONG before the Fifth Century AD. Sure we
                                don't know exactly where they were, but we know where they weren't
                                and are left only with those areas of the Forest/Steppe belt not
                                occupied by Balts, Finns, or Iranians, not too big an area
                                considering.

                                > I am aware of that. The point I was trying to make is that these
                                are the
                                > ONLY major flavours of Celtic that we know - and specifically, that
                                we do
                                > not have any evidence at all for your Central European version.

                                I'm not proposing an entirely new subfamily, I'm just musing over the
                                fact that there were P Celts in the area from the first few centuries
                                BC, lingering around until well into the First Millenium AD [as my
                                former lecturer Malcolm Todd says in his Early Germans, 1995], if not
                                later. The Poles around Cracow are quite enthusiastic about this
                                sort of thing lately. Anyway, we're left with almost a millennium in
                                which the form of P Celtic here must have gone its merry way so who
                                knows how this might have affected later tribal terminology. The
                                Celts here were quite a force to be reckoned with, what with their
                                control of the amber trade and all, and nothing easily disappears in
                                this world without leaving some reminder of itself. The Bavarians
                                preserve a memory of a long forgotten Celtic race in their name, so
                                why shouldn't the Doudleby have done?

                                > > wonder does the book for which you translated
                                > > the prefix dare to make any suppositions on the
                                > > presence of any peculiar developments in
                                > > phonology in your region?
                                >
                                > It is not supposition, it is observation of Celtic elements in some
                                place
                                > names. It also does not suggest peculiar developments in local
                                phonology,
                                > and I did not say that it did so.

                                I was only asking. You know, in British linguistics [see Kenneth
                                Jackson's Language and History in Early Britain – my favourite!] we
                                have no records for the form of `Welsh' that was spoken in Northern
                                England and Southern Scotland before the switch to English in about
                                the Eighth Century or beyond, apart from three words found in a law
                                code of Scotland. Nevertheless, our scholars have made tentative
                                suggestions as to possible developments that would serve to
                                distinguish this `Cumbric' from Welsh, drawing on placename evidence
                                and onomastica. I'm the same could be done, or may indeed have
                                already been done, in Czechland.

                                > Even if it did, though, surely this is just the sort of thing you
                                should be
                                > in favour of if you want to find any evidence to back up
                                your 'third way' of
                                > Celtic linguistic development in Central Europe? Either you think
                                there were
                                > phonological developments in the region or you don't, make your
                                mind up.

                                I would expect there to have been something.

                                > > Oh and so what? [snip]
                                > > Let me play Alastair! [snip]
                                > > And since when has my Romanticism been
                                > > hidden in a closet?!!
                                > Which of course is the nub of this discussion anyway, and I'm glad
                                you've
                                > finally come out and said it. You may be here just to play around
                                and wander
                                > off down some wild hypotheses that are very difficult to support,
                                but some
                                > of us prefer to share information which can actually be
                                substantiated, and
                                > which can feed into the practicalities of (historical)
                                reconstruction....
                                > which is what this list is about.

                                Well, so much for trying to inject a little lightheartedness. I'm
                                not here to play around and wander, I'm here to learn and discuss and
                                provide food for thought and stop my ideas bouncing around inside my
                                head with no outlet. How is any progress to be made if ideas are not
                                freely exchanged and debated. What does Sherlock Holmes say? "First
                                eliminate the impossible, and whatever remains, however improbable
                                …"

                                I'm not mad on this Celtic idea, it was just a digression, but not
                                one too absurd given the established presence of those lads in the
                                region for all that time. I would tend to favour the East Germanic
                                theory though, despite your problem with further evidence. Philology
                                is mature enough a discipline to trace a word back in time and
                                compare the result with other languages subjected to the same
                                treatment. Germano-Slavonic linguistic contacts are far more common
                                than you seem to realise at this early period, and can even be
                                decently dated when the evidence of peculiar sound shifts is seen.

                                As for the aims and boundaries of this list, on the home page it says
                                "Anything relating to pre-1650 Slavic history , or anything Slavic
                                as it pertains to the SCA is welcome here."
                                I think I am within that. I'm not one for dressing up myself, though
                                given time and opportunity I can see it might be fun, but I still
                                don't think I've wasted too much of anyone's time here [and would
                                appreciate if any onlookers who have hitherto been content to just
                                watch would support me here!], and I did help Marija with her
                                povoinik. ;o))

                                > Given the foregoing, pressure of work and an almost total
                                disinterest in
                                > linguistics, I see no point in pursuing this thread any further

                                That is a damned shame, Alastair. I hope you will reconsider, as I
                                have enjoyed talking with you here, and wish that you'd remember that
                                you started out as playing Devil's Advocate and therefore that any
                                patronising or offence from me is for Old Nick to care about, not
                                yourself. We're zemlyaki, Alastair, yedinorodtsy! And even more
                                than that, we're fellow Britons in a Sea of Slavs too! I'm sorry if
                                maybe I'm a little abrupt in my manner of speech sometimes, but Hey,
                                that's me. The Russkies don't mind. So far… Postuchi po derevu!

                                And how can a professional translator [let alone one in the
                                heritage/humanities trade] have "an almost total disinterest in>
                                linguistics" ??? Doesn't ring true!

                                Ah well, what do you want to argue about next?

                                All the bestest,
                                Ben

                                PS. It's the 4/9/04 so Happy Ìó÷åíèêè Àãàôîíèê, Çîòèê, Ôåîïðåïèé
                                (Áîãîëåï), Àêèíäèí, Ñåâåðèàí, Çèíîí è ïðî÷èå's day. [Martyrs
                                Agathonicos, Zotikos, Theoprepius, Acindinus, Severianus and Zinon,
                                of Nicomedia in Anatolia]. All tortured, forced marched to Thrakia
                                and put to death in the reign of Maximian [284 – 305 AD].
                                http://www.days.ru/Images/im1624.htm
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.